1. Field of the Invention
This invention relates to a communications process developed to eliminate the orthographic inconsistencies in standard language useage. This process has been applied to the English language and used in the development of a communications apparatus.
2. Description of the Related Art
The orthographic process in practically any language is inadequate and inefficient in a number of respects. The orthographics of the English language is particularly deficient in its use of several alphabetic characters to represent a single phonetic verbalized component, its use of verbalized components which are not adequately represented by alphabetic characters, and by its non-strategic placement of the phonetic verbalized components of a particular word. A major short-coming in the standard English orthographic process is that it is not governed by the laws of symbolic logic. Thus, the standard orthographic process of the English language is governed more by tradition than by logic.
The deficiencies in the standard English orthographic process are manifested in many ways. For example, English is one of the most difficult languages to learn to speak and to write. This is understandable when one considers the illogical placement, surplusage, or inadequacy of many alphabetic characters within a particular word. Such deficiencies have led to wide-spread illiteracy because of the difficulties in learning English as a primary or a second language.
A further difficulty in the standard English orthographic process that has become apparent is electronically communicating alphabetic characters. While Arabic numerals are readily digitalized and transmitted, alpha or verbalized communication has proven difficult. Because of the inefficiencies of the English orthographic process, alpha communications is particularly inefficient and is often confusing to the recipient of the message.
The deficiencies of the standard orthographic process are self-evident. For example, the standard English orthographic process has insufficient characters necessary for the representation of isolated phonetic components within many words. That is, there are many verbalized components in the English language which are not represented by indnividual alphabetic characterization under the standard English orthographic process. Examples of words where verbalized components are not adequately represented include "sing, either, vision, fashion, push, butcher, and chief."
Another deficiency in the standard English orthographic process is the impractical representation of many verbalized components. This results where alphabetic characters have been established and are generally accepted as representative of a particular verbalized phonetic component, but in certain words are substituted as representative of a different phonetic verbalized component. Thus, for many verbalized components a "standard" alphabetic representation is used giving rise to a standard pronunciation for such an alphabetic representation. However, in many uses, the alphabetic representation is indicative of another verbalized component, giving rise to a general rule of pronunciation riddled with complicated exceptions.
Still another deficiency in the standard English orthographic process is the inefficient use of alphabetic characters as representative of a verbalized phonetic component. Thus, many characters used in the English language are superfluous and have no orthographic significance. These superfluous alphabetic characters might be duplicate characters (such as "accord, green, lilly, floor, miss, etc.") or non-functional (e.g. "ghost, knife, mnemonic, pneumonia, song, sigh, etc."). Further superfluous characterization is evident in words where characters not recognized in pronunciation are used and purported to be of significance in pronunciation. These various specific character combinations are pronounced as single characters (e.g., "age, gage, great, quail, whale, waste, etc.") or ("machine, laugh, quack, etc.").